Not really, not entirely, but some discussion on the previous post about how the powers that be in this nation are now completely off the rails, and just when it was that this nation lost it’s way, prompted me to extrapolate a bit on the broader subject of conspiracies. The nation, of course, was in many ways off the rails from the founding, if you are even halfway convinced by Christopher Ferrara’s most important work, Liberty: The God that Failed, but I left a comment wherein I talked about how recent study has caused me to conclude that my previous belief – that conspiracy theories are almost always false – was itself a result of a deliberate effort by the CIA to discredit those who opposed their varying agendas. That is to say, it was the CIA itself that coined the phrase “conspiracy theory” in the 60s to squash those asking uncomfortable questions about the JFK assassination, the Vietnam War, morally questionable (or downright damnable) US activities in many countries, etc., etc……..and in fact came up with all the arguments against conspiracy theories I have tended to believe – that conspiracies are extremely hard to conduct, that they are impossible to keep secret, that to do X so many people would have to be involved that word would certainly get out, that “the real world doesn’t work that way,” among other things. [Sorry for those of you who get posts by e-mail, I wrote this in a huge hurry and really botched the grammar in this first paragraph. The first few sentences didn’t make much sense. Mea maxima culpa]

I had swallowed it hook, line, and sinker. To my comment:

One thing I learned recently, which was fascinating and has caused me to re-examine my own previously held notions, is that it was the CIA itself that coined the phrase “conspiracy theory” in response to continued doubts over the JFK assassination and other scandals of the 60s. I wouldn’t say I believe in black helicopters, the Illuminati, chemtrails, or anything quite like that just yet, but it is patently obvious at this point to anyone with an ounce of sense that there is a massive, ongoing conspiracy against conservatism, Trump, liberty, Christianity, and the conception of this nation as founded, or what was long presented as the conception of this nation, that has become so clumsy and obvious of late that it can no longer be ignored, but which in fact goes back decades if not much longer. And yes the US was wrongly founded from the beginning, in being not based on Catholicism (and in many respects hostile to the Faith as it was certainly practiced then, and had been since the early Church), and in being the product of a small dedicated group that sought the overthrow of the existing economic/political/cultural power structure and its replacement with another structure – with themselves in the positions of power. In other words, a conspiracy, and a successful one.

If you read the sad, US-influenced political and cultural history of Mexico since 1800, you will find almost exactly the same thing. A small cabal subverting the will of the vast majority of souls and imposing a hostile and alien construct upon the masses, for their own personal benefit.

And then there is the example of the Church, where again a relatively small cabal, infinitely aided by sympathetic, timid, and/or feckless leadership, has seized control and imposed a radically different construct on the (initially?) largely unwilling masses, and even convinced them of how good and wonderful all these changes have been. Just recently I had an exchange with some septuagenarians, very early boomers who were at just that “right” age at Vatican II, who are just utterly convinced of how wrong and awful the pre-conciliar Church was, and how wonderful all the changes have been. When I presented contradictory evidence, the implosion of vocations, tens of millions of souls lost to the Church in this country alone, etc., etc., they said those were POSITIVE developments, that it made absolutely no difference what “church” one belonged to and those people were probably better off outside the Church, given all the evils like the boy-rape epidemic and collapse of catechesis that have resulted (and that religious life was a crock, that it was a medieval concept for stuffing unmarried daughters and Jesus freaks into veritable asylums). There is absolutely no arguing with these people, no quoting of Scripture, no relation of the wisdom of the Fathers, no statistical data that can possibly move them from their position that Vatican II was an unalloyed good and what existed before an unalloyed evil. These people are wholesale devotees of the new religion foisted on the Church in the 60s. They only remain Catholic themselves for sentimental reasons, or, more demoniacally, to continue the work of destruction (and some of them have been long involved in just that).

These are just a handful of examples. I still do not believe that history in toto is more or less a collection of conspiracies successful and failed, but that doesn’t mean that extremely influential events have not been developed and decided by a (relatively) small group working to a particular purpose.

So get me a tinfoil hat and call me a conspiracy theorist, but honest reading of history reveals that a great many extremely influential events have been the result of a small cadre of dedicated activists, generally working in secret (see France, 1789). IOW, a conspiracy.

And I would say that all the cultural/moral travesties we have witnessed over the past 50-odd years are the result of a deliberate conspiracy aimed at destroying Western civilization and, in particular, the Church, in order to bring about a sexularist socialist “utopia.” I mean, transgender bathrooms, really? or arguing that guys (it’s always guys) who say no to men dressed up as women are hateful bigots? For real? Like that just happened organically, naturally? Riiiiiiight.

There will be a public discussion – a sort of debate, I guess – on the matter of how to respond to the current, absolutely unprecedented (in recorded history) Bishop of Rome we are confronted with sponsored by the University of Dallas tomorrow, Wed Jan 24 at 7:30 pm. The discussion is between Ross Douthat of the New York Slimes Times and extreme liberal Austin Ivereigh, and is moderated by journalist John Allen. So, basically, two leftists against a moderately conservative neo – the Left never appreciates a fair fight (as Jordan Peterson’s utter destruction of a British feminist last week demonstrated).

Here’s a blurb on the discussion –

UD will be hosting a public discussion of the current papacy this Wednesday (the 24th) at 7:30 pm in the Moody Performance Hall in downtown Dallas. It will be between Ross Douthat of the NYT and British journalist Austen Ivereigh, moderated by John Allen. These are three of the most prominent Catholic journalists in the English-speaking world, and we are very excited to have them here in Dallas. [Ivereigh is a close associate of the extremely progressive former Cardinal of Westminster Cormac Murphy-O’Connor, and basically gloated about the St. Gallen mafia and their role in enthroning Francis is a recent book]

This will be the first time in this country that one of Francis’s defenders (Ivereigh) and one of his critics (Douthat) have engaged each other face-to-face in public. Their moderator, John Allen, is probably the most well-known Vatican journalist in the world. [but definitely has a liberal bent, though less obvious than many of his confreres in the mainstream Catholic media. So it’s basically two against one]

We promise a fascinating and enlightening discussion, and I encourage all ICONers to attend. Tickets are $10 (free to UD faculty/staff/students).

I’ve got a wife with strep and probably bronchitis after nearly two weeks of flu, and several sick kids. So, no way I will attend. Having said that, part of me is interested to see what Douthat has to say, though I suspect I already know it. He is something of a critic of Francis, though hardly so thorough or penetrating as more traditional critics. Nevertheless, the interplay between the apologist Ivereigh and the critic Douthat could be interesting, though I doubt Allen provides anything like a level playing field, which will be maddening.

The thing is, what I think about this pope – Bishop of Rome, whatever – is pretty much settled. He is what he is. Goodness, as a man who understands the importance of gesture and media coverage, giving a pontifical medal to a rabid, murderous pro-abort the week of the March for Life in the US speaks for itself. He is pope, somehow, though I don’t understand, and God has allowed this for some reason I don’t understand, but I cannot see how Francis can be described as Catholic. He is a leftist ideologue with a wicked mean streak projecting an insincere joviality and the most publicity seeking “humility” in the history of ever. Much of that could be forgiven, however, if he did not so obviously loathe both the Faith and those who hold it. The problem is not with a pope with personal character failings. There have been plenty of those, and the Church weathered them just fine. The problem is a pope who is patently at war with the Faith.

At any rate, the tix (general admission only) are $5, so it’s a fairly cheap night out. Plan on another $10 or so for parking at least. I hope some video is shot and it shows up on Youtube. I am sort of interested in this debate to see where it goes, or rather, how far Douthat is willing to go in a hostile setting. He’s OK on some topics.

If any readers attend, leave a comment on your impressions. I’d appreciate it.

I think kudos to UD, for having the guts to host this debate, and even permit some criticism of Francis, muted though it may be? Of course, harsh criticism of popes from the Left has been not only permitted, but the central pillar of Catholic higher education around the world and especially in the West for decades, but this time it’s coming from the “wrong” side, the damnable right wingers.

I thank El Paso-based JMJHF Productions for all their work, especially their continued release of excellent catechesis material from Fr. Michael Rodriguez (on which, more later, God willing), but I really really appreciate their recent uploads of one of Fr. Rodriguez’ recent annual pilgrimages to Quito, Ecuador. The churches of Quito and its environs are shockingly, amazingly beautiful, true glories for not only the Church but the entire human race. This is the kind of heart that makes the soul sing and gives us creatures of mud and dust the slightest glimpses of heavenly glory. It is also the polar opposite of the modernist, often intentionally soul-crushing trash that has passed for Church art and architecture of the past 60-70 years. This damnable trend has been intentional, as fallen men sought to remake the Church in their own image, rather than aspire to follow the Truth of Jesus Christ.

The first video shows the Procession on the Feast Day of Our Lady of Good Success, February 2nd. The miraculous statue of Our Lady of Good Success is taken from the cloistered upper choir three times a year and placed above the main altar of the Convent Church to be venerated by the public. Fr. Michael Rodríguez offered the Traditional Latin Mass daily in the Conceptionist Church & Convent–home of Our Lady of Good Success (and look at how many souls assisted! The church is packed for a TLM, probably the first most all of these people, aside from the pilgrims (who were a tiny part of the crowd) had attended in decades, if ever). The technical name of the Church is, “Iglesia de La Limpia Concepcion”. This first monastery in Quito was established in September of 1575. Fr. Rodriguez also led pilgrims daily in praying the Holy Rosary and Novena to Our Lady of Good Success in front of the miraculous statue and gave spiritual conferences every evening on the major themes of Grace, Jesus Christ, and the Blessed Virgin Mary. Blessed be Jesus Christ and His most pure Mother!

Old town Quito is also beautiful in its own right, and also surprisingly well lit. It looks to me like many hundreds, possibly thousands, took part in the procession. How beautiful. What a glorious site Good Father Romanowski, formerly of the FSSP apostolate in Guadalajara and now pastor of a parish in Naples, FL, seems to have led the procession, in the traditional manner:

The next video is the one that really touches me – in both positive and negative ways. Ecuador has never been a rich country. Yet look at what pious souls built decades and centuries ago, out of their love for God and the Blessed Mother! And it was only right they do so – indeed it was a positive duty – to build the most beautiful, uplifting structures imaginable for the glory of God (which is His due) and for the good of souls. The modernist, concrete-and-sheetrock brutalist monstrosities that pass for Church construction in the past 70 years or so are the very antithesis of what is good for souls and properly due God. Even worse, you might even say sinfully, was the willful destruction of so much beauty created in total faith by previous generations of Catholics out of a perverse desire to create a new and false religion. Indeed, the profanation of Church art and architecture is a deliberate representation of the new religion promoted by modernist/leftists that must always stand in total opposition to the Faith of our Fathers.

There is a wide range of beauty below – parishes, basilica, cathedral, monasteries cum museums, etc. I have always adored Spanish colonial Catholic art, and the works of Latin American devotion that flowed from it for a century and a half after Spain lost her New World colonies. It is beautiful, wonderful stuff, treasures for the whole human race to glory in. These works also point to a time where the Faith was so utterly central to the lives of souls that I think we have a hard time even imagining it today, let alone emulating it in our own lives. We are so distracted by our trinkets of technology and our unheard of riches that our comprehension of the eternal is paltry and distracted. Perhaps I am speaking more for myself than for most of you, if so, I do not mean to cast aspersions.

I have exhausted my limited vocabulary in coming up with superlatives for this video and the Catholic treasures contained therein. Lord, may I go to Quito or other Latin American places soon, places where the ravages of wreckovation did not occur, or were at least kept to an absolute minimum! Look at all the altar rails! Look at the high altars still extant, and the prie deuxs, and the wonderful elevated pulpits (use them!), and the gilt ceilings and incredible reredos and the polychrome statues and original, extremely high quality and eminently Catholic paintings and……..you get the point. Thank you again to JMJHF Productions for putting these videos together. I know it takes a great deal of time, and this is not their full time job. Please consider helping them out, or the St. Vincent Ferrer Foundation, which also supports the work of good souls and Fr. Rodriguez!

The full list of sites in the video is below:

Conceptionist Monastery Church (Iglesia de La Limpia Concepcion), home of Our Lady of Good Success, in which Our Lady appeared to Mother Mariana.
Santo Domingo (St Dominic)
San Agustin (St Augustine)
Carmen del Atlo (Carmelite – where St Mariana, Lily of Quito used to live)
San Francisco
Santa Catalina
La Merced
La Compania (Jesuit, perhaps most glorious Church in the Americas…)
National Basilica to the Sacred Heart
(Cathedral Metropolitana) Basilica of the National Vow
Santa Barbara
Carmen del Bajo
Santa Teresita in La Mariscal
Church & Monastery of Guapalo
The Jesuit School where miraculous image of Our Lady of Quito is kept.

For those materialists who say, oh, this money is wasted, think of the poor who suffered want and privation when all this money was poured into churches like this – wouldn’t this money better have been spent on them, on alleviating their sufferings? But the poor we will always have with us, and I do not mean that in a cavalier manner in the least. Instead, think of how many souls happily gave of what little they had, which was infinitely less than any of us, to help render honor and glory to God and His Church to help build structures like this. Think of the grace that poured out on them and the world at large through such noble sacrifice. It is simply a wholly different and utterly incompatible mindset – that of faith and not of this world. Those who have it, have it, and understand instantly the willingness to deny self to give right glory to God, and those who don’t, simply don’t.

When I see amazing structures like this, and the immense good they still do for souls, and I ponder the opportunity we have locally – probably the only such opportunity the vast majority of us will ever have – to build a church that can really make an artistic statement, can really contribute to the great artistic treasure of the Church (one of the few such contributions to have been made in our lifetimes), I just think, we cannot mess this up. Iwould happily trade 500 seats for an amazing reredo, or a stupendous altar, or marble-covered walls, or original works of art. Heck, there are warehouses full of the stuff in Europe and Mexico, removed from any of the several churches being torn down weekly. It’s not even that expensive, much of it, certainly not compared to making it from scratch, if such can even be obtained. Anyway, I won’t rant on that anymore. This post is already much longer than I intended, and few outside this Diocese of Dallas care, and understandably so.

This news is almost a month old, but I think the implications are plain – once again, a leftist ecclesiastic demanding a “poorer church,” a “church of accompaniment” – has been found personally enriching himself at Church expense. Or, at least, there is substantial evidence of such. Even more, this enrichment seems to be directly tied to personal immorality of the type practiced in Sodom and Gomorrah, and seems to make plain why these leftist cardinals and other apparatchiks in the Church seek to implode the current moral edifice of the Faith, and replace it with one that is conducive to progressive mores.

There is a long article below, but the implications are damning, both for Rodriguez-Maradiaga, and for Francis, who has apparently sat on this information for over 6 months while deciding how to treat with one of his closest advisers and allies (my emphasis and comments):

When he finished reading the inquiry drafted by the apostolic envoy he himself had sent to Honduras last May, Pope Francis’ hands went up to his skullcap. He had just found out that his friend and main councilor — powerful cardinal Oscar Maradiaga, a staunch supporter of a poor and pauperist Church and coordinator of the Council of Cardinals after he appointed him in 2013 — had received over the years from the Catholic University of Tegucigalpa around 41,600 US dollars a month, with an additional 64,200 dollars bonus in December.Bergoglio had yet to learn that several witnesses, both ecclesiastical and secular, were accusing Maradiaga of investments in some companies in London topping a 1,2 million dollars that later vanished into thin air, or that the Court of Auditors of the small Central American nation was investigating a flow of large sums of money from the Honduran government to the Foundation for Education and Social Communication and to the Suyapa Foundation, both foundations of the local Church and therefore depending on Maradiaga himself.

“The Pope is sad and saddened, but also very determined at discovering the truth,” people of his entourage at Santa Marta, his residency, explain. [Uh huh. Is that why this was not made public for over 6 months, and in fact required investigative journalism (as in, not a Vatican press release) to uncover? Can you imagine the hue and cry if this had occurred under Benedict, with one of his closest advisers and supporters?] He wants to know every item of the investigation Argentine bishop Jorge Pedro Casaretto conducted in Honduras, on top, of course, of the final destination of the jaw-dropping sums of money obtained by the cardinal. Just in one year, 2015, as shown in an internal university report L’Espresso obtained, the cardinal received almost 600,000 dollars, a sum that according to some sources he collected for a decade in his capacity as “Grand Chancellor” of the university. However, some other rather unpleasant items account for the rest of the sums he received according to Bishop Casaretto’s report. The pope’s trustworthy person put down on paper the serious accusations many witnesses brought forward (the audits totaled around fifty witnesses and included administrative staff of the diocese and of the university, priests, seminarians and the cardinal’s driver and secretary) also against the Auxiliary Bishop of Tegucigalpa, Juan José Pineda, among the most loyal in Maradiaga’s inner circle and de facto his deputy in Central America. [We will learn just how close Rodriguez and Pineda are later on]

After studying the dossier he received directly six months ago, Pope Francis assigned to himself all final decisions to be made. [Because of course he did. Makes it easier to bury the unpleasant news. As Rorate has noted, Rodriguez Maradiaga was absolutely key in securing Francis’ election in 2013, and may well have used copious distribution of funds from his leadership of Caritas International to do so – at least, that is the implication, which no one in the media seems interested in investigating]

……..The accusations are many: “Some expenses go to close friends of Pineda, like a Mexican who calls himself ‘Father Erick’, but who never took his vows,” said a missionary. “The real name of the man is Erick Cravioto Fajardo. He lived for years in an apartment adjacent to that of the cardinal at Villa Iris. Pineda, who lived with him under the same roof, recently bought him a downtown apartment and a car. The money, we fear, came from university funds or from the diocese. We denounced this close and unseemly relationship also to the Vatican………[“Close and unseemly.” I think we can understand just what that means in this disastrous era of sodomitical penetration deep into the bowels of the Church – so to speak. So at least some of this pilfered money is going to the lover and buddy of Maradiaga’s protege and closest supporter, who just happens to live next door to the Cardinal. But we don’t need any investigation of a “gay mafia” in the Church, right Francis? Unbelievable.]

The witnesses envoy Casaretto audited talked also about investments to the tune of millions gone catastrophically sour: Maradiaga supposedly transferred large amounts of the diocese’s funds to some financial companies in London, like Leman Wealth Management (whose owner is one Youssry Henien, as the registers of the Company House of England and Wales show). Now part of the money entrusted (and deposited in accounts in German banks) seem to have vanished.

There is more to the story. Casaretto’s report also hints to likely huge flows of money from the media empire the archbishopric set up and Suyapa Foundation, which manages the newspapers and televisions of the diocese, controls. As to Bishop Pineda, local newspapers pinpointed him recently as being the man who orchestrated reckless financial operations and the recipient of public funds (for as much as 1,2 million dollars) allegedly destined to obscure projects aimed at “training of the faithful to the values ​​and understanding laws and social life”. According to the accusers, these expenses were never supported by valid documentation. [Which tends to be the way these guys operate, especially when they need to pay off aggrieved former lovers or the outraged families of violated children. This would hardly be the first time vast resources intended for the good of souls have been misdirected by unworthy men to enable their corrupt and immoral lifestyles.]

The Vatican is worried also about the Court of Auditors of Honduras’ launching of an accounting probe on the Catholic diocese there between 2012 and 2014. The prosecutors at the Tribunal Superior de Cuentas want to see clear about the lawfulness of the projects for which the government transferred every year tens of millions of lempiras to the Foundation for Education and Social Communication, whose official representative is still Maradiaga. As of the time of writing — so in a letter from the prosecutors L’Espresso obtained — the church did not produce the records on assets and liabilities and expenditure documentations. [Stonewalling from post-Vatican II Church bureaucrats? Unthinkable!]

Leftism is religion for immoral people. As Saint Thomas Aquinas and many other great Saints and Fathers of the Church have warned us, heresy, especially from ecclesiastics, is always a cover for personal immorality, almost always involving sins against the 6th and 9th Commandments. Once a man convinces himself that Church Doctrine is false and his error is truth, that God has lied or the Church radically misunderstood, there is no end to the depths to which he will stoop. I am not at all surprised that a major progressive Church operator is facing accusations of corruption and immorality – I only sense that there are far, far more such instances of which we are unaware, due to deliberate complicity by a media intent on protecting its co-religionists and ideological allies.

What a catastrophe for souls. How terribly, terribly sad. Whether AA-1025 be true or not in all its details, I think it unmistakable that communists/leftists did undertake a deliberate program to penetrate the priesthood and fill it with ravening wolves. I think that effort is dying out, at least in North America, but we shall be stuck with the products of it for decades to come, and with its effects for even longer.

I certainly admire Michael Matt very much, and almost always agree with him, but I think he may have gotten a bit ahead of himself when he advances, at least to a degree, the idea that the fact that 3 bishops and one cardinal (including some emeriti), as of about 10 days ago, had signed onto the statement of the 3 bishops of Kazakhstan, led by the redoubtable Bishop Athanasius Schneider, which asserted their rejection of Francis’ attempt to gut Catholic moral belief by permitting constant, regularized sacrilege through reception of the Blessed Sacrament by the divorced and civilly remarried.

Whew……..that was a run on. Anyway, I’m all for Schneider’s statement, I’m all for the reaction, but what I am is doubtful that this will be even the beginning of some kind of generalized reaction among the hierarchy, or even the priesthood, against the apparent errors of the Franciscan porntificate (see what I did there?).

This is not the first such reaction. We’ve had the statement by priests that they would continue to teach the Church’s constant belief regarding marriage. That topped out at under 1000 priests, last time I looked, in spite of the over 400,000 active priests in ministry today. So, about 0.25% of priests took even this minimal stand. Likewise, the few hundred priests and theologians who signed the statement led by Dr. Joseph Shaw similarly accusing Francis of promoting heresy, probably constituting much less than one tenth of one percent of all the priests and theologians in the world today. And there was the Dubia, which only 4 Cardinals out of well nearly 200 endorsed.

There are over 4000 active bishops in the Church today. The fact that 7 have endorsed this effort, again, indicates a support of less than 0.2% of the hierarchy for this very necessary rebuttal toward the Bishop of Rome.

Look, once again, I personally endorse and support all these efforts, but I have been discouraged by the lack of support they receive from those with formal roles within the ecclesiastical structure. Just as the entire traditional movement is purported to consist of perhaps 1-1.5 million people worldwide, and thus constitutes barely a tenth of one percent of the supposed 1.2 billion Catholics in the world today (but since the number of actual, active, believing Catholics might be 1/10th that number, we do make up a much larger percentage of the “practical Church”), and the hierarchy has managed to, at most, successfully pigeonhole us off, I think they can just as easily keep ignoring that 0.1% or 0.2% of bishops, priests, theologians, or whatever as troublemakers, miscreants, neo-Pelagians, or whatever. Our numbers are simply too small, on the human level, to have any kind of impact. I think it would take something more like 60 or 70, maybe even 150-200, bishops signing onto the Kazakhstan statement before it would start to really make waves. Even 200 would not constitute even 5% of the episcopate, and note that this ratio does not include the number of emerati that are around today.

Realistically, traditional Catholics are about the same in number, and about as relevant, humanly speaking, as the “Old Catholics” were at the time of Vatican I. How much influence did the Old Catholics have on the Church at Vatican I, and how much have they had since (as they have fallen into neo-liberal, pseudo-protestant heresy and even blasphemy, aping the worst of the most extreme progressive sects)? God forbid the same should happen to traditional Catholics. I don’t believe it will.

I bring all this up not to be a pessimist but to inject some realism into the discussion. I have promoted every one of these actions – the priest’s statement of adherence to the Church’s moral doctrine, the filial correction, the dubia, and now this statement from Kazakhstan. I am happy to do so. Indeed, nothing would make me happier – in a sense – than to wake up tomorrow and read that 500 bishops had signed onto this new “Athanasian Creed.” At the same time, however, I think we need to be realistic, and not develop unfounded hopes. In addition, while the Truth and justice, I think, demand such firm correction from bishops and cardinals against any error taught in the Church from any source, I also recognize that the process of exposing the error and excising it from the Church could be incredibly painful – though surely, in every respect, the right, just, and necessary thing to do (like a painful and difficult operation, necessary to save a life, but something no one looks forward to).

I also know we need things to talk about, and that folks need encouragement from time to time. So I don’t take too much issue with the argument forwarded by Matt, I just wouldn’t stake a great deal of hope on it.

Cliches exist because they often serve as a sort of shorthand for truth, an often glib but also uncannily accurate description of a place, an event, a tendency, etc. Now, cliches can serve to represent and advance unfair bias, and often do, and they can badly misrepresent and miss vital nuance. But having said that, the cliche of the mean ‘ol trad Catholic is probably the dominant, knee jerk reaction we trads have to contend with. And, not entirely unfairly, it must probably be said.

How has this come about? Likewise, what about the trad cliche of the silly, far from groovy, get over the 60s hippy dippy happy clappy define your own truth Novus Ordo type? How true are these descriptions, and from where might they stem?

My new sole source for blogging material, Tumblar House, has some answers below, which I found pretty insightful. In this case, I thought Charles Coulombe’s confrere made perhaps the most insightful contribution – we trads/faithful Catholics are the product of long years of avoiding and overcoming constant deadly threats, both to ourselves and to our children – you think a few years of that might make someone a little reserved in charity and prone to pounce on perceived threats with maybe a bit more relish than absolutely necessary? And how about the rank failure of the hierarchy to define and defend Truth, so that laity have, by default, often had to step into this role? Think that might also have had some less than perfect fruit?

This short segment also provides a keen insight into that strange entity, the former devout pre-conciliar Catholic who now so loved the old Mass and all the old devotions, and now, as a septuagenarian or octogenarian finds them repellent. This person may or may not be a hippy casualty leftist, they may be quite orthodox in their Novus Ordo way, but they just viscerally hate the old Mass. How could that person, on an objective level, exist, when the TLM is so manifestly superior on practically every level possible? Well, they went through the incredibly jarring experience of being told by the Church, their Mother, that all they loved and held dear was not just far from ideal, but positively harmful/dangerous, and would be replaced by something “better.” I can’t imagine how painful that must have been, nor the depth of Faith those folks had, and have, to have seen them through that experience. That’s not to say their reactions, then or now, were always the right ones or even virtuous (mass contraceptive use, anyone?), but it does help to explain how these people came about. I think it hard for someone like me, who converted on the cusp of the 21st century, to comprehend just how obedient Catholics were in the 1960s, and the entire expectation of obedience that was woven into the fabric of Catholic lives at that time. That ethos, once such a cornerstone of the Faith (to an extent that m may have been excessive and even unhealthy, as natural as it was given the external attacks the Church faced from 1789-1958, say) has been one of the biggest casualties of the collapse of hierarchical authority since the “new springtime” of Vatican Il Duce.

Basically the Church is badly broken, probably in worse shape than she’s ever been, and that has left the sheep largely fending for themselves. We should not be surprised that under such circumstances, the laity would be left confused and even divided into hostile camps. This will persist, in my surmise, until the revolution that afflicted the Church in the 60s/70s (and today) is definitively rolled back, either by overt act or by slow submersion beneath a renewed authentic Catholicism.

This is a talk given by Fr. Michael Rodríguez on October 6, 2017, in observance of the Feast of Our Lady of the Rosary (Oct. 7th) and the 100th Anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun (Oct. 13th). The talk covers three main themes: A Terrible Crisis in the Papacy, the Letter of Filial Correction, and the 100th Anniversary of the Fatima Apparitions.

Fr. Rodríguez makes an urgent plea to all of the world’s Catholics, especially those who are not familiar with the Traditional Latin Mass, but do have a sincere desire to be good and faithful Catholics. Fr. Rodríguez explains three great signs which God is giving us, thereby calling us to convert back to Him and to the true Catholic religion of 2000 years. These three signs from Heaven are: (1) the frightening crisis in the Papacy, (2) the historic “Letter of Filial Correction” and (3) the 100th Anniversary of the Miracle of the Sun.

[Tantumblogo adds a bit more – Father also, and very critically, establishes the bases upon which Catholic Truth is established (Tradition and Scripture), and their unalterable nature. This is absolutely key, for it reveals the core element of the crisis afflicting the papacy. I think it is also quite important to meditate on the quite likely supernatural correlation of events and dates – Francis, elected in 2013, the Fatima Apparitions, occurring on the 13th of each month, 2017 being the 100th anniversary of those anniversaries, dubia against Amoris Laetitia coming in 2017, along with a Filial Correction and, quite possibly, a fraternal correction from Cardinals. There is likely much more to come. Our Lord does not always work by exact dates, but 100th anniversaries of Marian apparitions have figured large in prior history, such as the failure of Louis XIV to consecrate France to the Sacred Heart in 1689, with the French Revolution breaking out exactly a century later. We must adhere to this Faith of the ages and reject the modernized, protestantized “new Catholicism” of the past 50 years.]

Fr. Rodríguez is one of the signatories of the Letter of Filial Correction of Pope Francis. Fr. Rodríguez explains both the Letter of Filial Correction, and how faithful Catholics must respond to the present, nearly unprecedented, crisis in the Papacy. He concludes with a brief teaching on the Message of Our Lady of Fatima. This is a must see video for all Catholics who desire to be faithful to God and the Church in the midst of a terrible crisis in the papacy.

[I can’t do justice to a condensation in the time I have, this video is close to an hour long but is extremely important – if you watch/listen to one video this week, let it be this one! God bless you and may this post and Father Rodriguez’ efforts all be Ad Maiorum Dei Gloriam. Please keep Father, Francis, and the entire hierarchy always in your prayers, and implore God to have mercy on our Holy Mother Church!]

I should have also added, that Father Rodriguez makes note that one of the specific matters of error emanating from this papacy is a statement from the increasingly notorious Cardinal Farrell that the awarding of manifest grave sinners with a prize for their sin (see, guys, we can turn this argument you love to use on its head) in the Eucharist for divorced and civilly remarried Catholics constitutes: “a process of discernment and conscience.” Uh huh.

…….and thus serves his patron and master. GloriaTV calls Farrell ultraliberal – an assessment I would have argued with once but not so much today (Farrell is a veritable weathervane for the ecclesiastical winds) – and notes his line of ad hominem attack against the signers of the Correctio Filialis:

Pope Francis “is not a heretic” according to the ultraliberal Curia Cardinal Kevin Farrell, 70. Taking to cruxnow.com on October 2, Farrell attacked the Filial Correction by launching personal attacks against the signatories rather than by responding to their arguments. According to him the signatories “use any excuse just to attack him [Francis].”

In response to the interview, one of the signatories, Deacon Nick Donnelly, states on twitter that Francis “is not accused of being a heretic, but of promulgating heresy”.

During a NCR-interview in 2016, Farrell insinuated that Amoris Laetitia has the same authority as the Bible, “Basically this is the Holy Spirit speaking to us.”

Please don’t tell me what good things Bishop Farrell did while he was here. First, that was then, this is now, but even more, he did a heckuva lot of bad things like totally ghettoizing the TLM and even blocking priests from offering Mass partially in Latin, Ad Orientem, or basically anything that substantially improved the reverence of the Mass. And that’s only his malfeasance with regard to the Liturgy. He did a few things better than his seminary but on the grand scale – and as we find out more and more after his departure – he was just what you would expect a creature of McCarrick would be.

I will say that there is scant difference between “promulgating heresy” and being a heretic. I suppose one can maintain the pious hope that Francis is acting in ignorant innocence with his manifold attacks upon the ancient Faith (get ready for further attacks on the Liturgy and Communion for protestants!), but I believe the massive evidence we have accrued in less than 5 years indicates that invincible ignorance is out of the question. I am also becoming increasingly aware of very poignant, pained, and emotional personal interventions made by good souls to Francis to amend his ways, but he has coldly and brusquely dismissed all of these. Perhaps some of these will make it to print one day, unfortunately what I have learned is too much of hearsay and unsubstantiated to print.

The nomination as a member of the Apostolic Signatura is “not a full-time position”, Cardinal Raymond Burke told journalists on Monday. He will assist in the work and serve as a judge when asked to do so.

Burke further stated according to Vaticanista Edward Pentin, that the nomination will not change nor delay his plans to issue a fraternal correction of Pope Francis if he further declines to answer the dubia.

I’d say the time for that correction is now, good Cardinal Burke. However, I can understand delay if you are having difficulty finding others to join you in this correction, though I suspect with the Correctio out there are gathering support, now is about as good as time as you will find.

Please pray for Cardinal Burke and all those who are working to stop the total dissolution of the Church. They need much support for strength. I am personally praying that more bishops – especially some active ones- will sign the Correctio and then join Burke in his own correction. Where things go from there will be in God’s hands, but I pray the truth may see the light of day and the Lord’s will be done.

……..and zero from the Priestly Fraternity of St. Peter, that I can tell.

Fr. Michael Rodriguez was added with the latest update of signatories from Monday. I have a hope that the organizers of the Correctio Filialis will reach out to some other priests I suggested. Then we might see some Fraternity priests on the list, if they have the gumption to sign.

One or two additional FSSPX priests signed. That’s fine, but there seems little broad-based movement there to endorse this filial correction.

I can certainly imagine some reasons why traditional priests would not want to sign. Indeed, there may exist directives in their orders not to do so.

But I pray the list of signatories will explode from far beyond the current 219 (which is wonderful and a great blessing in and of itself, but more would be far better). From my standpoint – and I’m sure there would be repercussions I would not like – every single traditional priest should sign this filial correction. But Catholic moral behavior is not governed strictly by consequences. If something is right and just and even a moral imperative to perform (which I would argue, given the threat posed by the errors emanating from this pontificate and the potential for far worse in the future, this is a moral imperative), it must be performed, the consequences be damned. At least, that’s what I always hear when I am told I have to be obedient to the post-conciliar establishment, no matter how disastrous the result of that obedience has been.

Surely, that argument cuts both ways? Or was it always just about expedience?

Here is a golden opportunity for tradition-loving priests to take a concrete action against the continued rape of Holy Mother Church and possibly towards a restoration of same………sign the @#$%&*!! petition. Or never bemoan the state of the Church again? (or, for tender ears, I could say it nicer: if you do not, how can you expect the laity to listen to your later complaints regarding the increasingly sad state of the Church?).

And yes, your prudential reasons for not signing have been considered and found wanting. Tantrumstompo has spoken.

So helpful for Massimo Fagglioli to help us out, showing us just what the “new springtime of endless new pentecosts infinitely better than the first” crowd believe:

Fagglioli – yes, I know – is a prominent adherent to, and advocate for, the “Bologna School,” the primary remaining intellectual force behind the radical reinvention of the Church as a man-made construct post-VII. Think Cardinal Martini, Yves Congar, and you get the picture.

“Not Catholic anymore.” The dream being, of course – and it is proudly proclaimed by some of Francis’ most intimate associates – to so radically change the Church that “reform” or, more properly, restoration, is impossible.

Even the logic behind that kind of statement tells us that holders of this view believe the Church is a human, rather than a Divine, construct. As the good old Jewish Pharisee Gamaliel (reputed to be St. Paul’s teacher before his conversion) says in Acts of the Apostles: if this thing be of God, we cannot destroy it and we will war against God, but if it be of men, it will die out of its own.

Fagglioli, “Tucho” Fernandez, Tagle, Maradaiga-Rodriguez – they proclaim very loudly they view the Church as a man-made construct, to be bent and shaped into any image they see fit (as good leftists would – and being good leftists, they naturally assume that THEY, and only they, are smart enough, caring enough, and just plain good enough to deserve, by right, the role of Church-redefiner).

Note also the admission that the Mass is the fulcrum around which this revolution has been worked, and it is also the means by which the Restoration will take place. For we know, contra so much of the hierarchical, institutional Church these days, that the Church, our Holy Mother, is ultimately the creation of God and that His Will shall be done, no matter how hard it may be to see that Will at this time.

I have become totally convinced that the best, the only way by which the Church will be restored is through the mass re-adoption of the Mass of St. Pius V and all the traditional rites of the Sacraments. It was no mistake at all that the revolutionaries at VII, contrary to the established agenda, chose to act on the revolution against the Liturgy first. They knew if they could remake the Liturgy into a pseudo-protestant, modernist-infused hootenanny then everything else would be not just wide open, but a matter of time.

So the spread of the TLM should be our highest priority, a sentiment echoed by the good Rodriguez brothers, one a priest, one a layman, speaking at the recent Fatima Center conference: